Western
Europe and North America, populated predominantly by white people,
have become infected by an attitude of disdain toward their majority
population. Political correctness is a dominant ideology. Racial
and ethnic minorities are on the rise. In the United States, it
is predicted that whites will cease to be in the majority by 2040.

In
February 2010, a white people’s organization associated
with American Renaissance magazine tried to hold a conference
in Herndon,
Virginia, near
Washington, D.C. This organization does not practice violence or advocate
illegal acts. It is, however, an intelligent advocate for white
people. The conference
had to be cancelled because activists associated with several “anti-racist” groups
(including a former high-ranking FBI official) put pressure on the hotels
where the conference was scheduled to be held. These individuals threatened
physical
violence against the hotel managers or their families, slipped literature
under the doors of hotel guests, or otherwise made life unpleasant for the
hotels
until they agreed not to host the conference. Four different hotels had contracted
with American Renaissance to hold the conference, and each time the contract
was cancelled under pressure.

These
violent threats directed against the hotels that had agreed to
hold the American Renaissance conference were an obvious
attempt to silence unpopular
political speech. Yet no news publication picked up the story. If this
kind of political thuggery had been practiced against an organization
supporting
racial minorities, the cancellation of its annual conference might have
been front-page news throughout the nation. Because, however, the
pressure was
directed
against a group of white people advocating specifically for the white race,
nobody cared. Such people are racists, racists are vermin, and vermin deserve
to bite the dust - seems to be the logic. Our practice
of free speech in America has sunk to that level of dishonesty.

The
leader of American Renaissance, Jared Taylor, subsequently did
two television
interviews regarding the conference cancellation. One was with
Jeff Crouere,
host of “Ringside Politics with a Punch” on station WLAE-TV
in New Orleans, Louisiana. (Crouere, a political conservative, gave me
my only
television interview when I ran in Louisiana’s 2004 Democratic
presidential primary.) The other interview was with “Russia Today”,
a worldwide broadcast of news from a Russian perspective. It seems to
me ironic that
the human-rights violation experienced by Jared Taylor would be of interest
to
a news organization headquartered in Moscow but not to any ones headquartered
in New York, Atlanta, or Washington, D.C. Even die-hard “conservative” commentators
in the United States such as Pat Buchanan or Bill O’Reilly declined
to become involved with this issue.

The
willingness of “Russia Today” to
accord Taylor the dignity of telling his side of the story, and the
unwillingness of major news media
in the United States to do the same, is admittedly slim evidence of
a broader trend. But let me extrapolate from this situation. My
first conclusion
would
be that it illustrates how the “pendulum of history” swings
from one extreme to another according to a dialectical process. My
second conclusion
would be that for Americans who identify positively with the white
race Russia has ceased to be an enemy but has instead become a kind
of racial
heartland
for white people.

Having
grown up in the 1950s, I thought of the Soviet Union in terms of
what Ronald Reagan later called an “evil empire”.
A single party controlled the nation politically. Monolithic state-run
media imposed a rigid ideology
on the Russian people. There was no freedom of speech or diversity
of opinion. A massive security apparatus maintained tight control
over the populace. We
thought of pudgy, humorless, middle-aged men reading from scripts
at party congresses or watching a parade of missiles from a platform
on
the Kremlin
wall.

Today
things are different. Vladimir Putin may be a former KGB agent
and his government may still be repressive by western standards.
Stylistically, however,
the Russian leaders have made great strides in overcoming the “sensuality
gap” posed by electronic media. Putin himself demonstrates
judo moves on a videotape and is photographed bare chested during
a fishing trip. He has
become personally popular. There are now free elections to the
Russian parliament. Moscow has become a center of commerce and
fashion. All
in all, Russia projects
a more “friendly” image from a western point of view.
And the fact that Russia Today reported the cancellation of the
American Renaissance conference,
in my view, represents a superior commitment to free political
discussion at least regarding the topic of race.

The
United States, on the other hand, has moved into a mode of
behavior that we used to associate with the old Soviet Union.
It is our nation
which invaded
the nation of Iraq and now has increased its military operations
in Afghanistan and Pakistan. While the ideology of Marxism was
abandoned in Russia,
we have embraced the hateful doctrines of political correctness.
Khrushchev
denounced
Stalinist rule in 1956. In our country, rumors of government
involvement in the assassinations of President Kennedy and in the
911 attacks
abound; and
there is evidence of an official coverup. Our government is financially
reckless and security-obsessed.

The
Russian people in the 1990s endured a decade of hardship and deprivation
with little help from
the west. A vast depopulation
took place. Today,
blessed with abundant natural resources, their economic future
seems bright while
ours in America is burdened with many bad decisions made during
the years of prosperity
and strength. Even the distinction between socialism and free-market
capitalism is becoming blurred.

I
think this illustrates the “lesson
of history” that no trend
or situation continues forever. To the contrary, situations
that persist for a long time tend to move to an opposite
position. The German philosopher Hegel
identified the dialectic of history in terms of thesis, antithesis,
and synthesis. The Russians have moved from repression to
freedom; and we in America, from
freedom to repression. Any bureaucratic consensus has a way
of undermining itself so that heresies of old become the
new orthodoxy. I daresay the the
extreme anti-white attitudes that now grip U.S. society will
give way to an equally extreme condemnation of the same attitudes
in the future. Those who
are battling political correctness today will become our
future heroes. That’s
how the dialectical process works in history.

I
happened to watch a two-hour program on public television about
a concert
that the former Beatle, Paul McCartney, gave
in Red
Square several years
ago. There were perhaps a hundred thousand young men and
women, maybe more, jammed
into Red Square who were cheering McCartney and his band.
For someone who remembers how Elvis Presley or the Beatles
themselves
were
received by
American youth
in the 1950s and 1960s, it was deja vu. The only difference
was that that, contrary to the rock scene in America sixty
years
ago, the
persons
who
attended the Moscow concert were mostly white.

The
public-television program pointed out that when the Beatles were
performing in the
1960s, the Soviet government
considered
them a
subversive element
and tried to crack down on rock ‘n roll music altogether.
So this culture went underground and thrived. When the
Beatles sang “Back in the U.S.S.R.” back
then, the song proved strangely prophetic.

The
rock ‘n
roll revolution did effectively bring an end the domination
of society by a grim political ideology. Even so, all
seemed forgotten and forgiven. During the McCartney
concert, the gates of the Kremlin opened. Out
walked Vladimir Putin and his entourage, seating themselves
among the crowd. The Russian defense minister confessed
to having owned a collection of Beatles
records when he was a teenager. McCartney even had
a friendly visit with Mikhail Gorbachev, Russia’s
last communist ruler.

This
event left me with the thought that the cultural and political
barriers that have traditionally
separated
Russia
from the
nations of western
Europe and America have largely broken down. The
Russian people went through hell
to get there but they have now arrived at a place
of dignity and equality with the West. Echoing Reagan,
it is now “spring time” in Russia while
in America, after so many years of bad government
and corporate policies, people are waiting for the
other
economic shoe to drop.

It
is the racial aspect, however, which interests me. The Russian
people are mostly
white. Theirs is
one
of the largest
and purest
concentrations
of white
people in the world. What’s more, Russian
society still respects its majority population.
It is true,
there are white “hate groups” in
Russia that practice violence against minorities.
Such tendencies need to be resisted. On the other
hand, Russian society may be relatively free of
the political correctness that has plagued communities
in western Europe and America.

If
a positive white identity can be developed without
disparaging, hating, or abusing non-white people,
Russia can become
a leader in the new politics
of identity that seems to be replacing religious
and economic politics in many parts of the world.
We in
the West can
then look to it
for moral guidance,
not the other way around.

Russian
society continues to have a problem with minorities as a result
of its imperialist
past.
The neighboring
nation of Chechnya
has been
a particular
thorn in its side. However, it does not have
as much tension as nations
in the west with nonnative groups - Muslims
in western Europe, Hispanics in
the United States - that have immigrated for
the sake of economic opportunity. Being a poor
country,
Russians
had
to do their
own work at all levels.
There was not an educated class of affluent
whites who had desk jobs, leaving the
low-paying manual labor to be done by immigrants.

For
this reason also, white people in Russia cannot be accused of being “historically
advantaged” if almost 80% of the population
falls into that category and this segment
is well represented everywhere on the socioeconomic
ladder.
The next largest segment, the Tatar people,
represent less than 4% of the population.
Therefore,
arguments concerning the systematic oppression
of non-white peoples
through slavery or other institutions or
historical events have less force here. The
guilt factor
undermining the majority population goes
out the window.

Another
factor contributing to the minority-rights
movement around the world has been the
presence of a politically
active Jewish
population. Jews, a
minority in all nations outside Israel,
have long honed the practice of agitating for
minority rights (their own) by attacking
the majority population on religious,
historical, cultural, and legal grounds.
At one time, Russia had a large Jewish
population. However,
Russian
Jews today
number less
than
a quarter-million
persons compared with five to six million
Jews
each in Israel and the United States. Whatever
Jews’ individual influence in Russia,
it is doubtful that a population this small
can control government policy.

As
a relatively homogeneous population, the Russian people
are in a position to
create
a nation that
is proud of
itself both
with respect
to its national
and racial identities. If whites come
under attack in other countries, this can perhaps
become a
place of refuge
for
members of the
white race. Napoleon
and Hitler both tried to conquer Russia
but found it too large and determined
to defend
itself.

In
the meanwhile, other whites in the west can cultivate closer ties
with their
brothers
and
sisters in Russia
while striving
to overcome
problems
within their
own society concerning education and
social stratification. The goal is
to create a
more closely knit society
with a common identity
rather
than
one
weakened from within by educational
differences and minority grievances. In that respect,
Russia can be a beacon of hope to whites
around the world who believed they
had lost the identity
battle.
For them,
it can
become a model
of a community
blessed with white racial self-pride.